The ITO, Ward-2(3), Surat V. Shri Sumpreet Kaur Saluja, Surat

ITA 1387/AHD/2013

• Counselvise Citation: [2016] 133 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 1570 (ITAT-AHMEDABAD)
• Duration Of Justice: 3 year(s) 15 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 25-05-2016
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Next Hearing Date: 24-05-2016
• Assessment Year: 2009-2010
• Appeal Filed On: 10-05-2013
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: NARENDRA SINGH
• Keywords: Audit objection; Tax effect
• Section: 69

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AHMEDABAD B BENCH AHMEDABAD , BEFORE SHRI SHAILENDRA KUMAR YADAV, JUDICIAL MEMBER, AND SHRI ANIL CHATURVEDI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER. ITA. NO.1387/AHD/2013 (ASSESSMENT YEAR:2009-10) INCOME-TAX OFFICER, WARD-2(3), SURAT APPELLANT VS. SHRI SUMPREET KAUR SALUJA 4-KRISHNA TEXTILE MARKET, RING ROAD, SURAT 395002 RESPONDENT PAN: AASPT7210K /BY APPELLANT : SHRI NARENDRA SINGH, SR. D. R. /BY RESPONDENT :WRITTEN SUBMISSION /DATE OF HEARING : 24.05.2016 /DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 25.05.2016 ORDER PER SHAILENDRA KUMAR YADAV, J.M: THIS APPEAL HAS BEEN FILED BY REVENUE AGAINST THE O RDER OF COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS)-II, SURAT, DATED 15.02.2013 FOR A.Y. 2009-10 ON FOLLOWING GROUNDS:- ITA NO.1387/AHD/13 A.Y. 09-10 [ITO VS. SHRI SUMPREET KAUR SALUJA] PAGE 2 [1] ON THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCE OF THE CASE AND IN LAW, THE LD. CIT(A)-II, SURAT HAS ERRED IN ALLOWING THE PLEA OF THE ASSESSEE AND ANNULLING THE ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS WITHOUT APPRECIATING THE FACT THAT THE NOTICE HAS BEEN SERVED IN TIME THROUGH SPEED POST AND EVEN IF ANY DISPUTE IS THERE IN THE TIMELY SERVICE OF NOTICE OR THE JURISDICTION , THE SERVICE OF NOTICE IS DEEMED TO BE VALID ACCORDANCE WITH THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 292BB OF THE IT ACT AS THE ASSESSEE HAS CO-OPERATED WITH THE ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS. [2] ON THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCE OF THE CASE AND IN LAW, THE LD. CIT(A)-II, SURAT HAS ERRED IN DELETING THE ADDITION OF RS.15,51,000/- MADE ON ACCOUNT OF UNEXPLAINED CASH DEPOSITS U/S 69 OF THE ACT WITHOUT APPRECIATING THE FACT THAT THE ASSESSEE FAILED TO EXPLAIN EACH AND EVERY CREDIT IN THE BANK ACCOUNT OR TO CORRELATE WITHDRAWAL WITH DEPOSITS. [3] ON THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCE OF THE CASE AND IN LAW, THE LD. CIT(A)-II, SURAT HAS ERRED IN DELETING THE ADDITION OF RS.15,51,000/- MADE ON ACCOUNT OF UNEXPLAINED CASH DEPOSITS U/S 69 OF THE ACT AFTER ADMITTING FRESH EVIDENCE DURING THE APPELLATE PROCEEDINGS WITHOUT GIVING ANY OPPORTUNITY TO THE A.O. U/S 46A(3). 2. BEFORE US, AT THE OUTSET, LD. AUTHORIZED REPRESE NTATIVE THROUGH WRITTEN SUBMISSION SUBMITTED THAT THE PRESE NT APPEAL OF THE REVENUE NEEDS TO BE DISMISSED ON ACCO UNT OF LOW TAX EFFECT IN VIEW OF THE CBDT CIRCULAR NO.21 O F 2015 DATED 10.12.2015. THE LD. DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTAT IVE FAIRLY ADMITTED THAT THE TAX EFFECT IS LESS THAN THE LIMIT PRESCRIBED BY THE AFORESAID CBDT CIRCULAR. ITA NO.1387/AHD/13 A.Y. 09-10 [ITO VS. SHRI SUMPREET KAUR SALUJA] PAGE 3 2.1 WE HAVE HEARD THE LD. DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE AND PERUSED THE MATERIAL ON RECORD. ON PERUSING TH E GROUNDS OF APPEAL RAISED BY THE REVENUE, WE PRIMA-F ACIE FIND THAT THE TAX EFFECT IN THIS APPEAL IS BELOW RS .10 LACS. AS PER THE ANNOUNCEMENT OF CENTRAL BOARD OF DIRECT TAX ES (CBDT) DATED 10.12.2015 (CIRCULAR NO.21 OF 2015), N O DEPARTMENT APPEALS ARE TO BE FILED AGAINST RELIEF G IVEN BY LD. CIT(A) BEFORE THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL UNLESS THE TAX EFFECT, EXCLUDING INTEREST, EXCEEDS RS.10 L ACS AND IT FURTHER STATES THAT THE INSTRUCTIONS WILL APPLY RETROSPECTIVELY TO THE PENDING APPEALS. THE BOARD HAS PROVIDED EXEMPTIONS AT CLAUSE (8) OF THE INSTRUCTIO NS WHEREIN IT HAS BEEN PROVIDED THAT THESE INSTRUCTION S WILL NOT BE APPLICABLE, IF VIRES OF ANY PROVISIONS HAS B EEN QUASHED BY IMPUGNED ORDER OR ADDITION WAS MADE ON S OME AUDIT OBJECTIONS OR THE ADDITION RELATES TO UNDISCL OSED FOREIGN ASSETS/BANK ACCOUNTS, ETC. WE PRIMA-FACIE F IND THAT THE PRESENT CASE DOES NOT FALL WITHIN THE EXEMPTION CLAUSE AND THE TAX EFFECT OF THIS IS BELOW RS. 10 LAKHS. IT IS FURTHER OBSERVED THAT SINCE, WHILE HEARING THE APPEAL, SUCH FACTORS WERE NOT CONSIDERED, THEREFORE, IN CASE, ON RE-VERI FICATION AT THE END OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER, IT CAME TO THE NO TICE THAT THE TAX EFFECT IS MORE OR IT FALLS WITHIN THE AMBIT OF EXCEPTIONS PROVIDED IN THE INSTRUCTION, THEN THE DEPARTMENT WILL BE AT LIBERTY TO APPROACH THE TRIBU NAL FOR RECALL OF THIS ORDER. SUCH APPLICATION SHOULD BE F ILED WITHIN ITA NO.1387/AHD/13 A.Y. 09-10 [ITO VS. SHRI SUMPREET KAUR SALUJA] PAGE 4 FOUR YEARS OF THIS ORDER. IN VIEW OF THE ABOVE, TH E APPEAL OF THE REVENUE IS DISMISSED. 3. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF REVENUE IS DISMISSE D. PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON THIS THE 25 TH DAY OF MAY, 2016. SD/- SD/- (ANIL CHATURVEDI) (SHAILENDRA KUMAR Y ADAV) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER AHMEDABAD: DATED 25/05/2016 TRUE COPY S.K.SINHA / COPY OF ORDER FORWARDED TO:- / REVENUE 2 / ASSESSEE $ %&%'( ) / CONCERNED CIT 4 )- / CIT (A) ,-./00'(1 '( 123& / DR, ITAT, AHMEDABAD 4/5678 / GUARD FILE. BY ORDER / 1 / 2% '( 123&